Financial costs of large carnivore translocations--accounting for conservation

PLoS One. 2014 Aug 15;9(8):e105042. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0105042. eCollection 2014.

Abstract

Human-carnivore conflict continues to present a major conservation challenge around the world. Translocation of large carnivores is widely implemented but remains strongly debated, in part because of a lack of cost transparency. We report detailed translocation costs for three large carnivore species in Namibia and across different translocation scenarios. We consider the effect of various parameters and factors on costs and translocation success. Total translocation cost for 30 individuals in 22 events was $80,681 (US Dollars). Median translocation cost per individual was $2,393, and $2,669 per event. Median cost per cheetah was $2,760 (n = 23), and $2,108 per leopard (n = 6). One hyaena was translocated at a cost of $1,672. Tracking technology was the single biggest cost element (56%), followed by captive holding and feeding. Soft releases, prolonged captivity and orphaned individuals also increased case-specific costs. A substantial proportion (65.4%) of the total translocation cost was successfully recovered from public interest groups. Less than half the translocations were confirmed successes (44.4%, 3 unknown) with a strong species bias. Four leopards (66.7%) were successfully translocated but only eight of the 20 cheetahs (40.0%) with known outcome met these strict criteria. None of the five habituated cheetahs was translocated successfully, nor was the hyaena. We introduce the concept of Individual Conservation Cost (ICC) and define it as the cost of one successfully translocated individual adjusted by costs of unsuccessful events of the same species. The median ICC for cheetah was $6,898 and $3,140 for leopard. Translocations are costly, but we demonstrate that they are not inherently more expensive than other strategies currently employed in non-lethal carnivore conflict management. We conclude that translocation should be one available option for conserving large carnivores, but needs to be critically evaluated on a case-by-case basis.

Publication types

  • Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't

MeSH terms

  • Acinonyx / physiology
  • Animals
  • Carnivora* / physiology
  • Endangered Species / economics*
  • Female
  • Humans
  • Hyaenidae / physiology
  • Male
  • Namibia
  • Panthera / physiology
  • Transportation / economics*

Grants and funding

This study was supported by grants (either financially or in-kind) from the National Geographic Big Cats Initiative (grant number: B10-11), Land Rover South Africa, Chester Zoo, Colchester Zoo, Sea World and Busch Gardens, Idea Wild, Sirtrack as well as SPOTS Foundation. Carnivore research at Ongava Research Center is funded by charitable donations from The Namibian Wildlife Conservation Trust (UK), West Midland Safari Park, the directors of Ongava Game Reserve, and the Zoological Society of Philadelphia. The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.